Alderson Is Charting A Smooth Course Despite CBA Draft Rule Changes

83 Comments + Add Comment

• Joe D January 23, 2013 at 9:41 am

  Matt, you keep blowing us away with articles like this one which showcases your incredible depth, range and objectivity as a writer. Nice post!
  • srt January 23, 2013 at 11:54 am

    Joe – I’m really enjoying the new authors you’ve recruited along with the regulars.
    From the young and optimistic to the old timers and memories (such as myself!). Fresh perspectives blend well with the business side of baseball as well as the passionate are-we-ever-going-to-compete-again type posts.

    MMO has become a must read daily site for me.
• SheawasBetter86 January 23, 2013 at 9:43 am

  I’m pretty sure that from the 11th round on, any money spent over 100,000 dollars, is added to your draft allotment cash. So, in that regard, there are restrictions in place to make sure teams don’t go nuts over slotting in the later rounds.

  So if you sign a 14th rounder to a 325,000 dollar bonus, 225,000 would count towards your allotment.
  • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 11:10 am

    You’re absolutely right, it goes against the total draft allocation if you go above $100,000. However, you can rig the system somewhat. Because the bonuses taken in the first ten rounds counts against the cap, but only the amount over $100,000 counts for later picks, by going cheap in say rounds 6 to 10, you are able to take more expensive players later, and you end up being able to spend more money — if you have it. So basically by going cheap (say for the sake of argument you hand out $20,000 bonuses in rounds 7 – 10) in the second half of the draft , you can spread the considerable leftover bonus money to players who may essentially wait until after the 10th round because that money could be tacked on to the $100,000. allocation resulting in bonuses in the neighborhood of $175,000. or more. By doing this teams can end up spending between $450,00 and $500,000 more. It may create a similar signability “trickle down” in the later rounds that we used to see in the early rounds.
    • DrDooby January 23, 2013 at 11:16 am

      Basically that´s what the Mets did with their 4th rounder Brandon Kaupe by signing him for a miniscule amount – and basically re-investing the money into their 11th (?) round pick, RH Chris Flexen who basically got a 3rd round caliber signing bonus.
• Sloatsburg Mets Fan January 23, 2013 at 9:46 am

  Great Post! Thanks for clearing up so many questions I had about this very confusing (at least for me) CBA.
• SheawasBetter86 January 23, 2013 at 9:49 am

  Also, excellent article. I agree completely with your assessment of the Mets and also think their current model for future success is necessary, since they will operate at such a low payroll.
• peter January 23, 2013 at 9:55 am

  I agree and good post, the roster can be around 95 to 100 mill next season and would be much more competitive. They can sign players through free agency and trade. Spending big to often is a recipe for short term winning and long term losing. And it is a maybe on the winning.
• Metstheory22 January 23, 2013 at 10:03 am

  Good Post.
• DrDooby January 23, 2013 at 10:09 am

  So far, what I´ve seen is a rather methodical, patient and totally un-emotional approach by Alderson & Co.

  Basically, the financial order has almost been restored.
  His first task of saving the franchise for ownership and stopping operating losses seems almost complete. The 2013 payroll for now is 95 million $. The 2013 cash flow is somewhere between 70 million and 95 million, depending on how you work with deferred payments and whether the money promised still gets paid out to a different account or whether it´s all on future cash flow.

  More importantly, the 2014 payroll as of today projects to be in the 55 million $ range – including arbitration eligible players. Add the deferred money for Jason Bay and you only have a “cash flow” in the low 60s. Going forward, the Mets will have all the financial flexibility in the MLB world to adjust their payroll to the strength of their team and act accordingly. An almost clean financial slate even while keeping everyone. It puts them into a very good position financially at the very least – since at least a winning New York team can easily make money while sporting a 140 million $ or so payroll, maybe even more.

  Basically what has happened here regarding the management of the major league roster has been a Baseball version of chemo therapy. It´s rough, stressful and may actually not solve the problem entirely. But it´s a necessary evil to hopefully get a fresh & healthy start going forward. My main point of criticism here has been the lack of creativity in adding cheap major league talent, instead relying on low upside veterans as plug-ins. And of course, failing to maximize the value of Reyes. The hauls for both Beltran & Dickey have been impressive however and exceeded even optimistic estimations.

  The change in the CBA and the draft have certainly somewhat hurt the process. However, I believe that the Mets have never spent as much money on back to back drafts as in 2011 and 2012 combined, have they ? The results remain to be seen, of course. But there certainly has been a change in approach, away from mostly lower ceiling (beyond round 1) college talent towards more of a mix of HS & college talent. The team has specifically targeted a bunch of hard-throwing RHP with above average command along the way and also changed some organizational philosophies, most notably inventing the “6-man rotation” and stressing the changeup as a key off-speed pitch and forcing pitchers to throw a certain amoung of pitches in games. So far, the results are quite promising to say the least.

  In any case, the current FO seems to have a pretty good idea of what they´re doing – which isn´t very fan friendly, especially with all the PR BS that comes attached with it. And it´s taking out some of the emotional side of baseball & team building too. But all I care about is a functional organization that is going to win constantly and I´m willing to be patient to get there (for another year)…
  • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 11:23 am

    I’m a little apprehensive about the loss of the revenue sharing money, but as I understand it, it will be gradual. I think the schedule over the next 4 years will be something like 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% by 2016, so it would be nice if revenues went up over those years to at least cover those loses — which if I’m not mistaken are around 40 million?
• Sloatsburg Mets Fan January 23, 2013 at 10:14 am

  IN COMING!!!
• Elsid1986 January 23, 2013 at 10:19 am

  While I understand this approach theoretically, the fact of the matter is, Sandy and Co need to realize that they need to start producing results on the field, and soon. The organization cannot keep promising the fan base a brighter future year after year. Everyone knew that they were financially stuck until 2013, so they get a pass while trying to restock the farm. But 2014 will be time to put up or shut up. Maybe not get to be a World Series Contender, but definatetly make moves to dramatically improve the major league team.
  • DrDooby January 23, 2013 at 10:50 am

    Yes, by 2014 results will need to be there. Not necessarily a 95-win championship season – but certainly an 85-win caliber team for a team that seems likely to improve going forward due to a young age structure and payroll flexibility and should also be able to contend for a long time.
    That´s the lofty goal (longterm).
• srt January 23, 2013 at 10:51 am

  Excellent article. Concise and simple outline of the new CBA rules and how the Mets appear to be moving their business model to adapt.
• TJ January 23, 2013 at 11:02 am

  Matt,
  Excellent article. A few points in trying to view Alderson objectively:
  - let’s not give him too much credit for “restoring” the team’s finances. When the owner has no cash, it is done by need, not choice. Most of the spending limitations on draftees were imposed by the CBA. Anyone of us bloggers could have done the same thing, it is not magic
  - regarding the improved Wilpon financial situation, again, most of this had nothing to do with Alderson or the Wilpons. The biggest issue, Madoff case, was settled for pennies on the dollar. Most of the 4% shares equity were purchased by the wilpons personally or SNY because no one else would buy them. This turned out to be ablessing in disguise. as the value of their assets increased dramatically due to the sale of the Dodgers and 49% of YES to Fox. Again, Alderson and the wilpons had nothing to do with this. But, the result of the increased equity was the ability to refinance big SNY debt, at more favorable rate, and increase the credit lines.
  - MLB’s new TV deals add even more cash into the mix, for all teams, again, Alderson had nothing to do with that
  - The financial storm has ended except for baseball operations/revenues, a direct reflection if the team’s ability to perform/compete. This is Alderson’s domain, and so far he gets an incomplete. If he improves the team, more fans go to Citifield, more watch SNY, revenues
  - while he has sold off assets to improve the young talent pool, he has resided over two 70 win teams, and has done virtually nothing to improve the 2013 team, even with cash in his pocket to spend. Now, the offseason is not yet over, so any judgments are premature. But, it strikes me that he knows he needs to do something with the 2013 team to stop the downward trend and negativity of the fanbase and restore the “brand” through a better on-the-field product
  - Despite the monies coming off the books in 2014, to remain competitive they will need to spend more that $95 to $100 million by 2015 simply due to increased TV revenues increasing everyone’s payroll. For a team in the biggest market with tickets priced amongst the highest in the game, even with a strong minor league feeder system, payroll will need to be in the top quarter of the league, especially if divisional competitors are willing to spend at the highest levels (Washington and Philly).
  • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 11:47 am

    “- while he has sold off assets to improve the young talent pool, he has resided over two 70 win teams, and has done virtually nothing to improve the 2013 team, even with cash in his pocket to spend. Now, the offseason is not yet over, so any judgments are premature. But, it strikes me that he knows he needs to do something with the 2013 team to stop the downward trend and negativity of the fanbase and restore the “brand” through a better on-the-field product”

    You’re right, I mean at some point after the loosing seasons pile up you’re just not doing a great job regardless of whether you’re doing the right things or not. There has to be a tangible change in fortune, and soon.
    • Hotstreak January 23, 2013 at 1:28 pm

      Baseball is a results business and its great to have a plan, but results do count. Yes instant gratification is bad but deferred gratification is the goal. The rigor of exercise and diet and eating healthy foods untimely has to show six back abs or an hour glass figure or some resemblance to that.
      • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 1:35 pm

        How do you get “back abs”? Reverse crunches?
        lol, j/k.
        • Hotstreak January 23, 2013 at 1:59 pm

          Oops
          • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 2:02 pm

            Point well taken though Hotstreak, we’re going on our 3rd year under Sandy? That’s 3 major league drafts, we need to start seeing some results. If the team totally bombs in 2013 it’s going to get real ugly.
        • TJ January 23, 2013 at 3:04 pm

          Check with Bonds and Clemens.
      • Hotstreak January 23, 2013 at 6:04 pm

        No one wants to hear about the labor pains, they just want to see the baby.
        –Lou Brock
• Joey D. January 23, 2013 at 11:20 am

  Hi Matt,

  Great – and I truly mean GREAT – breakdown of what Sandy Alderson is really all about – the corporate general manager whose professinal understanding of the game is limited but his professional understanding of the business cannot be exceed by anyone else.

  At this point, he is trying to create a business model for the Mets to follow while, at the same time, trying to create that under the burden of the tremendous debt and lack of financial resources the team has. Because of that, there is little room for investment in players – whether they be prospects or current major leaguers – because of the rigid steps he had to take in order to achieve that business model.

  Is it the correct model to follow? Considering it looks at the business of baseball in terms of (as you say) “securing value and controlling assets”, the first priority is to secure that value while controlling assets We’ve seen how unsuccessful going to the extreme that has been in producing competitive teams in places like Kansas City, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Seattle, Cleveland and Florida. Oakland (this season) and Tampa Bay are the two teams that found success following that business model. That is just two out of eight teams giving fans something to hope for (25 percent).

  Also, there is Sandy’s pragamatic mindset in terms at his looking at the game which, as you correctly say, is not looking at it in terms of:

  “where an entire season can hinge on a bad bounce or an awkward twist of a knee. Baseball is a game of hard chances and calculated risks,a patchwork guesswork of cheated inches and hanging breaking-balls where even your best-laid plans go astray three out of four times (if you’re good). It is not a game for the timid, it is a game where taking chances is rewarded and success is often the result of wild and unpredictable swings in fortune.”

  As long as Sandy insists of having his baseball people underneath take an approach which is based on some of his analytical conclusions I believe it will be unlikely that we can really field a competitve team based on the combination of the business model put in place (under these unusual financial circumstances) and his insistance on following conclusions drawn upon a superficial understanding of the professional game based advanced stats. If Sandy lets his baseball people decide to chose their own the path in which to follow given the financial guidelines he outlines which includes the use of saber stats as they see fit rather than being told to which ones to use (his PPPA methodology for example), that will be a different story.
  • ifthevansrockin January 23, 2013 at 1:14 pm

    Joey, I think this goes back to something I have said from the beginning, that job 1 for Sandy (well, #2 if you consider keeping the Wilpons afloat a seperate issue) was to rebuild the organization top to bottom, in a sustainable, efficient, functional model. This includes financial, philosophy, draft theory, and player developemnt. The ML roster is obviously an issue every year, but consider the other steps building the foundation that will (hopefully) let them put a winning team on the field year after year , before too long.

    Successful teams all do this. braves being the gold standard. there is a reason they are almost always successful, year after year, on a relatively modest budget.

    I always looked at the Wilpons as having enough money to be dangerous, but without any real plan or focus beyond the next year, or any concept of how to build a functional organization. All of which became abundantly clear when they no longer had the extra cash to try and buy themselves out of mistakes.
    • Joey D. January 23, 2013 at 2:09 pm

      Hi If,

      The difference we have is that I do not believe Sandy is qualified to put his stamp onto how the operation of baseball matters should be run.

      I do believe he saw the organization had no other choice but to cut back drasticly in all areas and not just the roster and create a new financial model not based on other organizations but specifically with the Mets with their cash flow suddenly going belly-up via Madoff and the loans that made based on Madoff investments.

      Under those circumstances, I believe the plan was to continue spending as little as possible and not really rebuilding in a planned baseball sense. Not that Wheeler and d’Arnaud might turn out to be very good players on their own right, but that to truly rebuild requires his baseball people to acquire more than a top rated pitching and catching prospect and make good draft selections.

      That is why his vision is more financial – as it with other clubs that have chosen not to spend finding there are other ways to make a good profit.
      • ifthevansrockin January 23, 2013 at 2:13 pm

        I think you are looking at spending as ML roster payroll, which in some ways is just the tip of the iceberg.
      • TJ January 23, 2013 at 10:40 pm

        I’m no Alderson backer, but I’m not sure why he gets labelled as an astute businessman that is not astute on baseball matters. He has been in the game for over 30 years, and has won it all in a position that matters. No one really questions his intelligence. Is it because he never played professionally? I don’t think that is fair.
        • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 11:22 pm

          “He has been in the game for over 30 years, and has won it all in a position that matters. ”

          Well lets be honest here…He won it all in the first 6 when it is even debatable about how much control and influence he had at the time and in the remaining 24 years he not only has done SQUAT but has done nothing but gut the Payroll of two teams with no sense of winning anywhere in sight.

          You can be a Doctor for 30 years too but that doesn’t mean your a better doctor than someone who has only 5 years of experience but is much smarter in the ways of medicine and treatment.

          Sandy’s issues are not lack of experience it is he has not learned anything from that experience…

          When he won he spent….SInce he has started down this don’t spend philosophy he hasn’t…

          The thing about Philosophers (which is what Sandy is) they may be smart but they don’t know the answer…If they knew the answer it wouldn’t be a philosophy it would be called a science!
          Philosophers are LOOKING for the answer…They don’t know what the answer is and thats the problem here.
  • Mailman January 24, 2013 at 9:41 am

    I thought the Mets were following the Madoff business model.
• TRS86 January 23, 2013 at 11:33 am

  Nice.
• Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 11:36 am

  Thanks Joe,

  “If Sandy lets his baseball people decide to chose their own the path in which to follow given the financial guidelines he outlines which includes the use of saber stats as they see fit rather than being told to which ones to use (his PPPA methodology for example), that will be a different story.”

  Yeah I totally agree there, although It did seem like DePo was running things during last year’s draft. In the end it all comes down to whether DePo and Ricci make the right choices — they haven’t always done so(!).

  You make an interesting point about the extent to which Alderson’s philosophy may influence the decisions of his subordinates. I hope what he’s advocating is a broad direction rather than micromanaging player decisions. The broad direction seems to involve really loading up on a certain type of pitching (right handed, durable, hard throwing) and it seems to be working, at least in the minor leagues.
• Mr North Jersey January 23, 2013 at 11:46 am

  One thing Matt. Where you wrote,
  “There are also no restrictions after the first ten rounds, are we going to have a situation where a talent bubble is pushed to the 11th round after the “penalty phase” ends?”

  My understanding is there are restrictions in spending after the 1st 10 rounds as well. Monies spent on a draft pick after the 1st 10 rounds do not count against a team’s bonus pool except if it exceeds $100K. If a signing exceeds $100K the difference will be counted against the bonus pool.
• Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 11:49 am

  Yes, SheawasBetter86 pointed that out, see reply posted above.
  • Mr North Jersey January 23, 2013 at 11:57 am

    Ahh, Sorry my bad I have yet to read the comments. Hat tip to Sheawasbetter.
• SheawasBetter86 January 23, 2013 at 11:57 am

  I get your point Matt, but you still have a set amount regardless so it all equals out. They should just pick best available and when they run out of money, start taking extremely cheap players who could fill out the minor league system.

  Why draft a 20,000 guy in the 7th round and then spend 400,000 in round 15? Just get the best available at your pick and you won’t go wrong.
  • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 12:05 pm

    Well because if you do that you get the 100,000 allocation tacked onto whatever else you want to spend after the 10th round, which, as DrDooby pointed out above is exactly what we did with Brandon Kaupe & Kris Flexen. It is confusing but in the end you end up being able to spend more. Here’s a nice breakdown of how it works (from a Ranger site): http://www.lonestarball.com/2012/6/6/3068258/gaming-the-system-mlb-draft-day-3-and-all-those-seniors-drafted
• Joey D. January 23, 2013 at 12:03 pm

  “Alderson seems to have left the baseball end of the organization to DePotesta and Ricciardi while he’s focused on streamlining the business and the administrative domains.”

  Yes, which again raises the question of how astute a baseball end professional he is and if he was the architect of those Oakland teams. If he was able to handle the complex business and legal ends in Oakland – and be the one who did the evaluation of players and player moves for the parent club at the same time with the aid of consultants – there would be no reason why he would not be doing the same here in New York.

  This is why his days in Oakland are so important to the situation now because that in turn, will answer the question of why he was hired by the Mets (sans Selig) – for his professional knowledge of the game or his professional knowledge of the business. Did he leave the baseball end of the organization others in Oakland while he focused on “streamlining the business and the administrative domains” there as well?

  Oh, and for the record, I used the word “others” and did not mention the name of anyone else in Oakland.
  • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    That’s a tough question, I guess the M.O. is the same and there are certain similarities in the product (the lineups), i.e., the emphasis on getting on base and power (although it has yet to really materialize my impression is that a “Sandy” team will hit their share of home runs). There was also his time in San Diego in between though. A friend from CA told me that he was basically brought in there to do what he’s doing now in NY, only it was even worse in S.D. He really chopped that team up and sold off the pieces — interestingly they had a couple of decent seasons right after he left. In San Diego they were left feeling like Sandy was MLB’s hatchet man. There is an element of oblivious ruthlessness in Sandy that really has to be admired.
    • Joey D. January 23, 2013 at 1:55 pm

      Hi Matt,

      Actually, based on your answer, it really isn’t such a tough question at all.

      My own conclusion is that Sandy has such an extreme confidence in himself that it is actually borders on an arrogance which does not allow him to see his shortcomings – not in any series of decisions that he might later on admit he was wrong with, but in his mindset. Thus he is not open to allowing himself to realize he might not have re-invented the wheel when it comes to baseball as it should be played and that he really does not understand the game professionally. He might not be like the other new breed of corporate general managers who might learn more about the game through advanced statstical analysis but know enough to leave the decision of the path to be taken to his or her baseball people.
    • Just-Da-Damaja January 23, 2013 at 9:41 pm

      “There is an element of oblivious ruthlessness in Sandy that really has to be admired.”

      You mean the way he handled the whole Trevor Hoffman thing ?
      • Matt Balasis January 24, 2013 at 10:47 am

        Pretty much, I mean people compare it to the Reyes situation but in both cases it was probably the right decision to let them go. Trevor was pretty much done (OK he had one more good season but he was OLD), and Reyes, well lets wait and see how the Jays handle the 22 million per he’s going to earn from 2014 – 2016. The mistake with Reyes was not getting any compensation for him — that was botched no other way to look at it. It’s encouraging on the other hand that Sandy was able to sign David Wright. I really think Sandy believed they’d be able to sign Reyes and as the season progressed with Jose closing in on a batting title two things happened — they were very reluctant to trade him (because the fans would have absolutely gone bananas) and they could do nothing but sit back and watch his price go up. In retrospect, they should have traded him (he’d leave anyway), but they got caught with their hands behind their backs. After Jose won the batting title I think they still felt they could approach him with a reasonable 6 year offer, then the Marlins blew him away. Ironically, with Reyes, the biggest mistake was Sandy NOT being Sandy and simply trading him without remorse or sentiment — there were some UNBELIEVABLE packages floating around for Jose starting with what the Rays were offering.
• wasadeyo January 23, 2013 at 1:15 pm

  Went to Mlb.com for Mayo’s write up of our new No. 1 rated catcher. Checked out the top 50 draft class and noted all the potential outfielders…… probably should hold on to our no. 11 pick
• Metsie January 23, 2013 at 2:26 pm

  I would point out that anyone who knows about Business and is successful has said you have to be willing to FAIL and take risks to be successful….

  This is the problem I have with saying Sandy is a smart business man….

  Playing it safe may not RUIN a business that is going well but it also won’t GROW that business and achieve much either….

  As an example when Jobs was ousted it was due to the fact that they did not want to take risks and just play things safe to keep what money they had flowing in….

  When that started to wane they brought Jobs back in who took MAJOR risks by dumping millions of development dollars into risky ventures like the iPhone and iPad and as a result of the risk taking turned Apple into one the biggest (and most cash rich) compainies on the planet!

  Sandy is playing things safe…Thats fine for a profitable company….
  Not for a company that is bleeding cash and relies on the public wanting what it is your selling.

  And if he was really as smart in business as people give him credit for he would know that and have taken the risks needed to rise to the top and grow the franchise.

  Guys like Cuban, Trump, and Jobs, didn’t get to where they are by playing it safe and only looking at the bottomline…
  They look at what the TOPLINE could be and figured out what risks they needed to take to get there!
  • taskmaster4450 January 23, 2013 at 6:30 pm

    HP took a big risk by moving away from their focus of printers and got involved with the Compaq mess….there is a Jason Bay of a deal that they still havent recovered from.

    And a point you fail to consider, Alderson walked into an organization losing $75M a year. He isnt playing it safe to maintain profitability…he is trying to return them to profitability.
• Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 3:08 pm

  Trump?

  I hear what you’re saying Metsie, there is certainly a case to be made for shaking things up. The problem however with the Mets is you have on the one hand an extremely unstable ownership group that may only now be coming out of a very tumultuous period. On the other hand you have MLB, whose interests are in facilitating a stable and profitable franchise in NY. Between those two you have your virtual MLB appointee Sandy Alderson, whose job it is to turn the team around while at the same time stabilizing it’s finances (in the event of a sale). As someone posted on an earlier comment, it would be easier if we could “take more chances” if we still had the capacity to throw gobs of money at our mistakes. I don’t mean to be an Alderson apologist, but you get the sense that this isn’t Sandy’s first go around, he’s priming the club for eventual profitability (and I think he will get there). Success on the field is another story.
  • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 4:18 pm

    Matt I under stand what your saying regarding the Ownerships supposed issue (I don’t really believe thats true but will accept it for the case of this discussion)

    They have and MLB appointed guardian to help get what they claim to want …a profitable franchise in NY.

    They lost 23 Million last year!

    Thats two years into the fix!
    They started losing 50 MIl which is why they appointed Sandy in the first place…

    While it is reasonable that Sandy is SUPPOSED to be the cure….
    The plan they are using is not curing anything.
    Because it goes against the fundamentals of normal business that tranascends the boudaries of just Baseball Business.

    A Business in financil difficulty will make cuts, thats true but not cut so much that it is actually counter to thier bottom line.Or make cuts that affects the product they need to sell.
    The solution is to find cuts that do not make the problem worse and to take some risk that solves the problem better than any amount of cuts can.

    A store who needs to cut inventory because it can’t afford to maintain all that stock does not go about cutting the products that STILL bring people into the store. Sure would be dumb to cut your biggest sellers!
    It finds ways to cut the stock that does NOT sell either via a sale, or trade of it altogether and replacing it with newer products that might sell.
    We purged the only stock worth seeing on the promise of some product that may arrive years from now and the people interested won’t show until that product gets here.

    The financial problems are not caused by the Wilpons financial tumult it merely denies the Wilpons from being the solution to the REAL problem…

    They do not have the money to throw at the problem.
    The money has to come from elsewhere….

    It could come from the customers if they had spent even 10-13 Million on an MLB player people might like to see and help win a few games that will draw even more.

    In the end they havn’t fixed the product, fix the finances, all the payroll felxability we kept hearing we were getting has still not arrived and considering they lost 23 Mil last year and will lose even more now that Dickey’s draw to see a Cy Young winner is gone by the time Bay and Santana come off the books the team will be closer to break even at best and certainly not in any better position towards taking a risk next year than they are now.

    So in the end all we have done is tread water a little cheaper than we were before with ALL numbers being down compared to what we were when this solution started.

    Attendance is way down as is the money we spend…
    We wil still be close to losing money and in the same exact position next offseason that we are in now…
    No money to buy a difference maker and more likely to trade a Niese or Davis to get more kids because if they can equal what we traded we will at least save money….

    Almost a BIGGER risk than signing someone good considering the bust rate of prospects in the MLB wouldn’t you say?
    • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 6:10 pm

      Metsie, (and Hank),
      First let me say to Metsie, I appreciate your insight — you present these rational cogent arguments that arguments make me think things through … I always end up learning stuff from these exchanges.

      Ostensibly, you’re absolutely right, particularly at the major league level. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to ignore the major league roster particularly in light of the team’s losses. You are basically arguing (& correct me if I’m wrong) that spending money now makes sense in spite of the fact that it probably won’t buy is a pennant and in spite of the fact that it won’t help the sustainability model (down the road), because it would bring some much needed revenue back to the team. What I believe the Met FO is trying to do is align what they see as a wave of talent with financial flexibility. It’s a timing thing — my guess is Sandy wants to be certain that when we do start to see a “critical mass” of talent hit the majors we’re in a position (optimal efficiency) to augment the roster by spending. Your argument, and it’s a good one, is that while doing it this way would make sense in a smaller market, in NY, where you can still make a lot of money if you improve your product, it makes more sense to spend even when you’re down. It goes back to the discussion about “taking chances.” The problem with this, however, is twofold. First, as the Red Sox and Marlins of recent years have shown, spending doesn’t always bring success, if it were as easy as purchasing more hot-pockets for your grocery because hot-pockets are selling then it would be a no-brainer to spend, but there are no guarantees in baseball. The potential loss from spending 20 – 30 million would have to be added to whatever losses you’d incur at the gate if the team didn’t perform, and THAT is where the Wilpon’s come back into the picture — they may not as yet be in a position to absorb the kind of disaster the Red Sox and Marlins endured over the past couple of seasons. Secondly, in order to employ a sustainable model you have to actually employ a sustainable model. How much Sandy is willing to “gamble” on putting more fans in the seats really won’t help down the road unless this roster catches lightning in a bottle and takes off. Every attendance study I’ve ever seen shows that rebuilding a fan base after a down time takes a while (2 – 3 years). If the Mets are OK, maybe a few games under .500 but not really in contention, the fans may STILL stay away regardless of whether you’ve just signed Valverde, Farnsworth, Lohse, and Bourne … and these contracts would deter from your ability to mount a concerted augmentation plan down the road when your prospects mature. But again, the potential losses from such a debacle may simply be insurmountable for current ownership, it may simply be too much of a gamble for the Wilpons. You don’t bet everything you have on a long shot when you could save your chips and bet on a sure (or surer) thing. That’s my only explanation really for why Sandy doesn’t appear to be purchasing even a token free agent or two (if only to appease the fan-base), the alternative is that Sandy just doesn’t care if gate proceeds continue to decline and wouldn’t mind at all if the Wilpons are forced to sell … which I wish i could believe but it’s just too “conspiracy theorist” farfetched.
      • ifthevansrockin January 23, 2013 at 6:16 pm

        matt, I look at the conundrum as spending the money on a 1 year option, if there are no prospects being blocked, just because you have it available (not that you expect it to lead to a playoff team, but hopefully to sell enough tickets to pay for the outlay). But that assumes the money is otherwise “lost” (nothing to do with it?), as opposed to paying off debts (likely), or what you would hope happens, in that they spend it a year later when the talent bulge finally hits the majors.

        another way of saying it is, if they could spend 90 but only spend 70, does that mean the next year is still 90 or 110?
        • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 6:33 pm

          My guess is that it would still be 90 only the Wilpons will be a little bit less in debt, but let me preface that by pointing out there is a TON of language in the CBA about restrictions on team proceeds going towards paying off debt. If the funds were actually allocated for the team, the WIlpons may be prevented from taking it back out to pay down debt. That was actually a big reason for the changes in the revenue sharing rules, it wasn’t just about taking revenue sharing away from the top 15 markets, the smaller markets are prohibited from using this money on “non-baseball” expenditures and it specifically bars teams from spending it on debt (they have to invest it in improving the “on field” product) … Now as for spending less than the team’s budgeted amount, I’m not sure. (There is also a lot of language about projected budgets and transparency with MLB) … That’s a really good question.
          • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 7:44 pm

            Don’t get too into the debt talk….
            For one the Mets don’t have any….Th Wilpons dobut not the Mets which is all that the MLB has any jurisdiction over….

            As for the Wilpon Debts (Stadium and Network) those entities are expected to pay thier own debts it’s actually PART of their business plan…

            What role the Mets play in that is merely about the Attendance and product.
            The more attendance the Mets draw the money Money the stadium makes and has to pay off it’s debts. Same with the network as more fans want to see the team and go to the game the harder it is to get tickets leaving the Networks rating to go up.

            The Mets themselves could make 100MIl next year and none of it would go towards paying the stadium and SNY loans….MLB would not allow that practice they might allow the WIlpons to recoup the close to 143Mil they have had to put in to pay the bills (and that number is high since most of the money that paid them was not Wilpon Money but money from the sale of Team Shares.)

            But if the Mets fail to draw attendance and fan interest it will make the Satdium and Network situation worse and harder to pay the debt especially if the Mets lose money again in the proccess.

            So while they are all inter-related in thier profit.loss…The key thing that affects them all is that attendance.

            And if you had a business that lost money three years running, the year you make a profit is usually not the year you start investing again….

            You usually wait another two years to make sure you are sure the profits are going to last.

            Which is why as badly needed as the rebuild of the Minors is concerned there will be no point in having a Minor League system if the team they are meant to sustain is out of business and no one cares about seeing anymore…
      • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 7:31 pm

        “that spending money now makes sense in spite of the fact that it probably won’t buy is a pennant and in spite of the fact that it won’t help the sustainability model”

        Yes in part I feel sustainability can only be attained via the draft. Not even Trading as was the case with Dickey helps the sustainability because you lost about as much as you gained short and maybe even long term. Especially if that kid doesn’t meet the cieling that many are projecting. But there is some logic to that deal that fits with what I’m saying….Problem is the timing for it is a bit off but more on that later…

        Sustainability can’t be solved by an aquisition today. But an acquisition can keep enough money coming in (even without a playoff you can at least make a profit) and by not having a drain on finances you can re-invest the profits into more improvement. Attendance is all about Fan Faith, the more faith they have the more tickets you sell.

        By getting a good CF today on a 3 year deal he himself may not win us a Playoff. But he might be enough to help someone else to win it for us. Certainly more than some AAAA guy who puts money in the bank (but not really just takes less money out of it when all is said and done.)

        And if your top Rookie CF is about 3 years away it is smarter for business to sign a guy who won’t hold the team back from winning the next 3 years, maybe be good enough to not lose attendance or by helping someone else actually help increase attendance and by the time that deal is near an end your Rookie hopeful can take his place, Save you some money that you can maybe put towards improving something else…If your rookie comes up at the right time you can even trade the player you signed, put the rookie there, sustained the performance AND added another kid to look forward to Two years from now to fix something else….
        Sustainability….

        In the meantime that player you bought may not get you a playoff but it doesn’t take much to get you Fan Respect. Certainly would get more fan respect from signing a Victorino to 13 Mil 3 year deal than we will throwing Kirk and AAAA RHB platoon partner will. Certainly even Hairston would generate more fan faith than that does.

        And if you can maintain a decent level of Fan trust when the good PLAYOFF MAKING move DOES happen to come along… the chasm to Trust enough to watch and Trust enough to pay to go is not that hard to breach. Not to mention the money to make the deal.

        No one expects thier team to win and make the playoffs every year (except maybe Yankee fans and they pay for that priviledge with even higher ticket and concession prices than we do.)
        But they do expect to have a better than 50/50 chance of buying a ticket and seeing the team win. Or at least want to see a team that has a good shot at being better than last year.

        If you at least show your trying to be better than last year they will continue to go regardless of the hope of a playoff. Cause most fans don’t get to see the playoffs anyway unless they hold season tickets…

        And if you can at least maintain the attendance, whenever the time comes that you ARE within shot of the playoffs you won’t have to worry about not having enough money to get what you need. You won’t have loans or have your own money you need to take out that was put in for past losses.

        Not every business can expand every year. But the key to expansion is to make sure your not losing money, retain customer faith in your product long enough so that when you DO find yourself ready to expand and add a product that sells and draws customers, the risk is mostly paid for by the steady profits you made before the risk taking plus the sales of the new product everyone wants.

        The Wright signing gave a lot of fans faith regarding the changing of the tide here and not because Wright made us a contender either….
        And then we traded Dickey which proved to everyone nothing is changed we are the same team minus one Cy Young Pitcher….

        And they might have gotten away with it if they had spent the money they would have spent on Dickey and Hairston on an OFer who would have made next season better if not a playoff season.

        Better Team, Better Attendance, More revenue, Time to draft and develop kids to take the place of those you bought who then get traded for more kids to replace the next bought player all at a cheaper rate and SUSTAINABLE!

        Building from within should ALWAYS be done….But it should not be done at the expense of the MLB performance and revenue. The Good GMs build from within AND improve their MLB team whenever possible. Only 10 teams actually make the playoffs each year…As far as we know only ONE of them lost money! US!

        If Sandy had went out and paid one of the many OFs that were out there this year attendance might still drop due to Dickey but maybe not as much as it will with trading Dickey alone.
        We have Wheeler to take Dickey’s place and while I would have preferred Wheeler took Santana’s place in the end it is sort of the type of deal I was referring to above.

        I just wish it had included an OFer instead of an A Ball pitcher….Cause then the deal fits with what I’m saying above.
        Trading an older player who has a young guy to replace him and is cheaper, for some kids to replace someone else further down the line that maybe your drafts were unable to upgrade themselves.

        The only thing the Dickey deal doesn’t really fit there is that we traded Cy Young for a Thole Upgrade and the other player is too far waay from replacing Santana.

        That said looking at this year….

        We seem to be willing to buy an OFer and a Starting Pitcher to take Dickey’s place.
        The Pitcher and OF we seem to be looking at are one year bandaids at best.
        Which means they do nothing to really improve the team, Will only have to be redone again next year…

        But if we bought a DECENT to above average CF (like a Victorino) on a 3 year contract we could wait for Nimmo to develop, CF would be covered with a reasonably good player for 3 years who could be traded when Nimmo arrives for another kid.
        Or bought a decent SP on a two or three year deal which could hold us until Snydergaard was ready that might be encouragment enough for people to say well I won’t get to see Dickey but I won’t see a scrub either….

        Money comes in and by the time those kids are ready to take over you HAVE the money to go buy an Upton or Bourne or even someone much better.
        All because you don’t have the 5 years of losing money due to having a product no one wants to see..
        In the end you probably can’t sustain a WINNING MLB franchise via free agency unless your ready to spend the way the Yankees do…..

        While you might not sustain the Winning that way you certainly can sustain the attendance and if you do you will have money to pay who you bought and the next guy who DOES get you that WInning and Playoff.
        • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 8:25 pm

          Well, we’re kind of in agreement here. I understand why he might not want to invest 30 million, but I don’t really understand why Alderson has done pretty much NOTHING to upgrade last year’s roster. I get building up the farm and sustainability and all that, but unless he’s gunning for a 1st round pick or actively trying to force the Wilpons to sell by turning Citi Field into an empty shell (both highly doubtful), I think he has one or two tricks left up his sleeve. I believe Alderson will eventually end up signing a couple of decent players — Hairston and Marcum or something like that. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if he signed more than one starter. I think he’ll probably sign a reliever too. He could be waiting for things to shake out and prices to fall, hopefully that strategy won’t backfire.

          As far as Dickey goes, it was a solid deal for the Mets (in terms of present day value) no matter how you slice it.
          • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 9:36 pm

            Again the Dickey deal makes sense maybe in a WIN perspective but only hurts the issue that caused them to make that deal and not sign anyone….Lack of Attendance which will be lower now resulting in less money made to improve the team further.

            As for Sandy having something up his sleeve…
            Looking at the players left he could possibly pull out there really isn’t anything that going to impress the fans all that much…

            Just look at the conversations regarding Bourne and Upton here and it’s obvious while they are BIG improvements over what we will throw out there no one thinks they are making this team all that good or are even worth having….

            Only if thier price is right.

            I am convinced he will simply pull Hairston out of his sleeve which pretty much makes us the same team minus one Cy Young Pitcher and an upgrade to Thole.
            anything else is years away….
            • TJ January 23, 2013 at 10:58 pm

              Metsie,
              You make some excellent points. The Wilpons basically have stabilized the financial mess that they had by settling the Madoff case for pennies on the dollar and refinancing the SNY debt at a lower rate and expanded credit. The remaining fix is to reverse the trend of diminishing baseball revenues – ticket sales and SNY ratings – and the only way to do this is with a better product. The brand is very damaged, as paying customers have seen the popular homegrown star SS walk with no return, the multi-talented CF be dealt (return exciting but still undetermied) and the popular Cy Young winner be dealt. All the while, tickets remain top-priced in the sport. Most fans, a critical mass, resent this ownership and feel taken advantage of. Alderson absolutely needs to give the fans a reason to come to the part in 2013. Watching Wheeler, D’Arnaud, and Harvey develop while the get plastered like they did last August will not nearly be enough. If the attendance dips to 1.8 million, while the Nats and Braves are both improved in 2013 and well positioned to sustain a high level of competitiveness, the Mets will be in big big trouble going forward, even with the depth of minor league pitching talent. Improvements need to start now.
              • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 11:44 pm

                Any ONE of those moves was survivable….
                If you look at each deal as an island (Pagan and K-Rod exceptions) you can make a reasonable case for them….

                The problem is when you slap them all together and see the trend.

                Lets forget the K-Rod trade despite he was on the path to 46 Saves that year and we haven’t had a closer since….

                Beltran – The BEST player on the 2011 team traded…Who remained as the best player on the team after that?
                REYES – Gets told show me your worth the contract, wins a batting title gets no contract not even an OFFER…
                Pagan – Well once Beltran is gone the best OFer on the team is Pagan he gets traded for yesterdays laundry and all it’s smells!
                Dickey – Pitches a Cy Young season, they won’t even give him a 3 year contract at roughly 10 Mil per….TRADED

                No one is going to see a team where the best player every year is traded and replaced by reject pile crap that isn’t even worthy of an MLB contract!

                Hairston like it or not is currently the BEST OFer we had left and we won’t pay him either…

                Well if you wont pay to keep the best you have and if you have seen we are not all that thrilled even paying to see them when they HAVE those players what makes Sandy think we are going to pay to see the team without them.

                If he wants to have money to spend then he had better work on getting more money not saving what little money he has.

                If he think d’Arnaud is going to sell as many tickets as Dickey did then he can’t even be a tenth as smart as people want to believe he is….

                So we will have even LESS money to spend next year and guess what there is no young kid left in the Farm that is going to change that!
                The kids he has anyone likes will be here this year and if they don’t win THIS year no one is going to believe they will win Next year especially when you have less money to help them in 2014 than you had in 2013 when there was OF available to be had that is cheaper than it would be in 2014.
      • DrDooby January 24, 2013 at 4:45 am

        In this situation, Alderson – in the interest of ownership – wasn´t going to take any chances.
        Alderson inherited payroll obligations for the 2011 season of 130 million+ $ with about 6 to 8 roster spots to fill and a team that realistically wasn´t going to be a legit playoff contender with its ace Johan Santana probably out for most if not all of the season. Revenue had already seen a significant decline in 2010, the 2nd straight sub .500 season with the existing core after back-to-back late season collapses in the two previous years. Let alone payroll obligations for 2012 and 2013 of over at least 90 million $ each – in spite of several key pieces from the existing roster inherited eligible for free agency in the meantime.

        The two options were:
        # 1 Play high-stakes poker and go “all-in” and find a way to turn the .500 caliber team Alderson inherited that had underachieved the two previous seasons, battered & bruised by injuries, into a legit playoff contender for 2011. With one outcome being a successful 2011 season and playoff Baseball at Citifield and investing an extra 25 to 30 million $ potentially being worth avoiding 50 million $ in losses. And the other outcome being failing to reach the playoffs and probably ownership losing the franchise with their entire business being smashed by the Madoff scam, the Picard suit and the sagging economy – be it right after 2011 or the following year (because a 160 million $ payroll in 2011 probably means a 125 million $ payroll in 2012 as well at the very least).

        # 2 Play it safe, cut back costs drastically, rebuild operations from ground up longterm and try to bridge shortterm operating losses to have a streamlined business model a couple of years later. Basically what the Mets chose to do was a “Chapter 11″ type procedure – but instead of protection from its creditors, protection (and bridge loans) from Bud Selig & friends at MLB. While it´s unfortunate for us fans that the Wilpons have kept and probably will keep the franchise, this was the only “safe” way to reach this goal.

        By the end of 2013, the financial restructuring will be complete. By then, the focus can shift back to the major league roster and turning the Mets into a profitable asset again – which they certainly can be, especially combined with SNY if they are a successful team. Especially, if they are a successful team without a bloated payroll and a sustainable roster.
        • Matt Balasis January 24, 2013 at 8:50 am

          Yes, exactly … well said DrDooby.
        • Joey D. January 24, 2013 at 9:54 am

          Hi DrD.,

          “By the end of 2013, the financial restructuring will be complete. By then, the focus can shift back to the major league roster and turning the Mets into a profitable asset again ”

          But how can that be? The financial restructuring will indeed be complete and by that it means continuing the fiscal operations as they are now. Sandy might have made a cost efficient way of making profit but that is based on the drastic cut backs that are now in place and limits spending.

          The only way further re-investment can come is for additional revenue. Are the Mets going to bring in more in 2013 than they did in 2012? In 2012, the reason attendance fell only in the neighborhood it did was because those figures included half-price tickets, R.A. packs and many other promotions. The Wilpons have increased ticket prices in 2013 – will that be enough to offset the further dwindling of attendance?

          And what about the loans that the Wilpons have to face beginning the following year? How much of the balanced budget Sandy has put in place accounts for that as well?

          We have a two year window when the roster payroll drops. If Sandy’s long-term budget does include using the approximate $25 million in each of those two years for re-investment, that is fine. But what type of players will that get us? Only those like Hairston, Francisco and others who would only expect to get contracts under those terms. What about the better players who demand (and can get) longer, multi-year contracts? The payroll – with the players that Sandy has now and projecting their salary increases – is projected to return to the neighborhood of $81 million or so in 2016 – that is maybe $5 million less than it is now.

          Is a $85 to $90 million payroll something that Sandy envisions for the seasons beginning in 2016 and part of his long-term projecting operating budget (which is the sum of all expenses – not just David Wright but the custodial worker who cleans up the stands after the game as well plus the cost of refilling all the office the water coolers)?

          And besides the loans – what about the $600K in dividends owed to each of the seven minority owners (not SNY) who invested $20 million last year? That’s $4.2 million in annual dividends – and the minority share holders are only obligated to hold on to their shares for three years – which will be around the middle of 2015. What then if they want out?

          So yes, by the end of 2013, the financial restructuring will be complete. The question is what will that resemble? I don’t think many are going to like the answer.
        • Metsie January 24, 2013 at 11:46 am

          There WAS a 3rd option available to them…..
          Purge one of the underperforming high salaries (read Bay) by making a trade to someone who had a park he could hit in and while we get little in return you would have saved more than you did when we did that same type of thing with K-Rod….

          We got nothing back from K-Rod at all….And he was at least doing his job….

          Save the money on Bay and you have the money to retain a Beltran or go get someone else cheaper in FA to replace him or Bay.

          We have seen both the Marlins and Red Sox make deals to get rid of players who had a high salary and didn’t want to pay anymore….

          So the assumption we couldn’t do that is just convenient for those who want to make an excuse for Sandy not actually truthful….

          He had the option he just couldn’t get a deal done, just like he couldn’t get a deal done for Hairston at the deadline…
• Hank January 23, 2013 at 4:54 pm

  I care too much about the MLB product that continues to decline to applaud our GM. Sorry. it might be shortsighted. It might be petty. it might not be fair or right. But it is what it is…our team continues to decline in talent, lose more each season, fans keep running away and growing disillusioned, and yeah. it’s hard to applaud the man leading the front office in all of this.
• tlagee January 23, 2013 at 5:18 pm

  Matt – great unbiased, unfiltered analysis – though I will have to read it three times to absorb it properly (and I’m not that smart).

  Thanks and well done.
• Old School Mets Fan January 23, 2013 at 6:57 pm

  Since Sandy Alderson inherited a 79-83 team, the Mets record has been

  2011: 77-85
  2012: 74-88
  2013: (does anyone seriously think this team will win 74 games?)

  That will be three seasons and counting where the major league squad has gotten worse each year. The bullpen is a Frank Francisco (who was terrible BEFORE needing surgery); Bobby Parnell who has shown he is a nice middle reliever but cannot close. Then Carson, Edgin, Mejia and Familia who have a combined 105 innings of major league experience. Pitchers and catchers report in 19 days. Apparently any attempt at signing Jon Rauch appears to be going nowhere so this is likely the bullpen we will go north with.

  Catching will be John Buck and his .192 average. Yes better than Thole, but in the sense that the Andrea Doria was better than the Titanic. D’Arnaud will not be called up until the All-Star Break at the earliest and remember he’s coming off a pretty major injury and hasn’t played a game since June 25, 2012. You would think they will groom him slowly as there is no need to rush him this year.

  Infield is solid with Wright, Tejada, Murphy and Davis. Valdespin and Turner are so-so backups.

  The current outfield of Duda, Kirk and Baxter (with Cowgill) is preposterous.

  The starting rotation is Santana (coming off another injury), Niese, Harvey, Gee (coming off an injury) and ?. That really leaves you with two good starters and a bunch of question marks. You will likely not see Zack Wheeler until August because, again, why rush him?

  Mind you this does not take into account injury, which happens to all major league teams. But any injury to an infielder or to even one starter, and this roster has the makings of a 100 loss team that will be near the bottom in runs scored and at the top in blown saves, a combination that may well make the team unwatchable this year.

  And we’re supposed to applaud the architect of this fiasco because he’s saving the Wilpons money and maybe the team will be good in 2015, Alderson’s 5th season? Like I said in a prior post, he had 15 seasons as GM with the A’s and had 4 good (90 plus) seasons. He took over an 87 win San Diego team and had two good seaons before they trailed off. Does that sound like someone who knows how to build a sustained winner to you?

  Look, I fully realize the constraints the man is under due to the Wilpons’ financial straits. But people act like he invented baseball because he basically talks a good game, slashed payroll and was able to trade an All-Star rightfielder and a 20 game winner for good prospects. He’s a mediocre GM, no more, no less
• tlagee January 23, 2013 at 7:00 pm

  Matt:

  ” This is the business model. I’ll take that kind of sustainability any time over the occasional go for broke shopping sprees of previous off-seasons, as exciting as they were at the time.”

  I get it that we are too far from winning to make major investments in the team right now. I also get it that the reason that we are too far removed from being a playoff team is that Sandy had to get the finances in order – and to do that he had to take most of the good Mets players (who made the team competitive) and either not re-sign them or trade them.

  What I am struggling with is having a business model for a baseball team in the number one market in the world that is in no way, shape or form, fan friendly. Why couldn’t there have been an even approach to fixing the finances? Why did it suddenly have to go from 151 million to 93 million?

  Baseball is entertainment. The Mets haven’t been very entertaining since Sandy came on board and they stand to be even less entertaining for the next couple of years. By entertaining I mean competitive.

  All business models recognise that it takes investments (money) to make money. The attendance has gone down significantly since Sandy came on board and everything points to it going down even more next year. The ratings for SNY are behind not only YES but also MSG.

  While getting the team finances in order, the team is forfeiting a profit and more importantly, a future audience. Young New Yorkers are flocking to the Yankees because, quite frankly, they are more entertaining. Once a child favors a team they stay with them for life. And we’re not talking about the charming losing teams of the 60′s – there is nothing charming about a team being gutted.

  And all the talk about building for the future would make one wonder why, in the last two years, they failed to offer a contract to a home grown 27 year old player and traded two good outfielders and a Cy Young award winner. Why they didn’t offer their highly recruited 2nd round pick at least the slot requirement – which his father said would be enough to sign him.

  I was in contact with someone who lives in Toronto and pointed out to them that they have two terrific players in Dickey and Reyes. And it got me thinking that any team would be significantly improved with those two players. Without them we are indeed two far away from ‘tweaking’ the team.

  A business model for the future? Well, one can argue that what Sandy is doing NOW is the right way to go because we are so far away from contending. What one would have a hard time arguing is that the team had to be this bad in the first place – with no outfield and a bad bullpen – to get us to this point.
  • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 7:55 pm

    They simply may not have the money to gamble on player acquisition, mostly because there is no guarantee we’d be contenders even with Reyes and Dickey. Spending 20 – 30 million (which is conservative if you’re talking really going for broke) might not amount to more than a handful of wins if things don’t break right. Look at the Marlins. The difference between the Mets and the Marlins is that while the Marlins might be able to absorb losing money from last season, the Wilpons could very well be pushed over the financial brink if you add 40 million in losses at the gate and 30 million in a payroll increase. It’s a gamble they can’t afford. Dickey and Reyes alone would all but use up a 30 million increase, but realistically you’d need a 40 – 45 million increase if you wanted a real shot at the wildcard (we’re in a tough division as you know). So then if they bomb you’re looking at a monumental financial disaster next summer on the heels of some significant revenue sharing cuts. The Red Sox can absorb a calamity like this, the Wilpon’s can’t. While it makes sense to spend money if you want to make money, you have to have that money to spend in the first place. So if you concede that the team is too far away from contending, then you’re best bet is to sell off your assets and shore up the future when you will hopefully build a much safer bet. But none of this has a prayer of a chance if you don’t succeed in building a really good minor league system, which again is why it’s so important that they develop the farm system. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, why? because … the alternative is too frightening to even imagine – namely that Sandy Alderson simply has no idea how to run a big market team!

    I doubt that’s true though, business is his thing, I can’t imagine Alderson doesn’t understand the intricacies and dynamics of operating in a big market.
    • tlagee January 23, 2013 at 9:12 pm

      Matt – as I said before – you have done a great job.

      “They simply may not have the money to gamble on player acquisition, mostly because there is no guarantee we’d be contenders even with Reyes and Dickey.”

      The funny thing is that you can guarantee that without them they WON’T be contenders. All decisions now are financial. With no bullpen and no outfield and a pretty crappy team it’s pretty obvious that the team they are fielding is not a priority. The fans are not a priority. And as I mentioned before, their attempt to sell the future is disingenuous. The future is murky at best.

      While I see your point, the origins of the financial mess have to do with Katz and Wilpon weaving the team’s financial future through a Ponzi scheme.

      In order to keep the team, the approach now is creating a brand new but incredibly cheaper and non-competitive franchise with what used to be the Mets.

      When the Madoff scandal hit, Fred should have done the courageous thing and sold the team. Instead he’s holding on to a once great franchise with his fingernails.

      Selig has allowed this to happen.
    • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 9:31 pm

      But we keep going back to main problem people have here…
      The WINS don’t pay the bills….So if your focused on the Moeny issue stop talking about WINS and PLAYOFFS. 22 Teams don’t make the playoffs and still turn a profit.

      the Attendance does and getting someone will inspire some more ticket sales, if they win more with that guy even more attendance is the result.

      Sure they might win just as many with him as without him but they still are ahead on Attendance for the tickets they sold because people liked the signing.

      If they don’t find a way to stop loosing attendance they will never have the money when it comes time to buy a player to make the playoffs.
      • tlagee January 23, 2013 at 9:58 pm

        Metsie -

        Not wins or playoffs but compettitive. That will bring the fans back.
        • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 11:16 pm

          Not competitive as meaning competing for the playoffs even…

          Just give fans a better than 50/50 shot at seeing the Mets win and they will go because they LOVE to go to see a baseball game they just don’t want to go if the team is going to lose everytime out and ruin their fine day in the end!

          Too many fans are in this all or nothing mode…
          Either your spending to get into a playoffs or spend nothing and just lose while you rebuild…
          There is a whole wide swatch of IN BETWEEN that isn’t glory and isnt god awful and thats all it takes to get enough people to go see a baseball game enough to turn a profit and pay the bills with some left over to invest in improving the team.

          Once you have restored Attendance to a point where your paying the bills it’s easy to take the next step and win or will carry you through the 5-10 years it takes to rebuild without having to dismantle your MLB team to do it…
          • tlagee January 23, 2013 at 11:39 pm

            “Just give fans a better than 50/50 shot at seeing the Mets win …”

            That’s my definition of competitive.
            • Metsie January 24, 2013 at 11:11 am

              Yes TL me and you are on the same page but there are others here who seem to think competitive means in the playoffs.
• Joey D. January 23, 2013 at 9:11 pm

  Hi Matt,

  Just again want to say how VERY IMPRESSED I AM not with what you initially wrote but with your thorough and well thought out responses, looking at both sides of the issue before coming to a conclusion.

  Unlike others, you are recognizing this is a business and that Sandy is approaching it in that manner and so there is the real possibility that his moves are meant less in terms of competition as they are in terms of finance. I think that is all those of us who feel that way want – just the acknowledgement from others that this is a real possibility and that the moves are not part of a well devised and long-term vision and that his call was not to build a winner as it was a sincere hope that a winner could be produced with the fiscal cutting he was going to make.

  As for myself, I think during these more than two yeas of observing Sandy, listening to how astutely he can talk about finance and business compared to how superficial is his talk about the professional aspects of the game, our better understanding of just how serious the Mets financial situation is (which included the intervention of Bud Selig who had to urge Sandy to leave a job he was very happy with to take on a position he had no original interest in) plus our own vetting to get to understand him better – it is obvious he is no baseball team architect as he is a baseball business architect nor neither a combination of the two.
  • tlagee January 23, 2013 at 9:15 pm

    Joey – well put!
    • Joey D. January 23, 2013 at 9:44 pm

      Hi tl,

      I was going to say the same exact thing about your most recent comments as well!

      Just great and they reflect my sentiments exactly.

      This is not the storied franchise we once loved but a business and even before Sandy came on board and the Madoff scheme revealed, the Wilpons were already planning to squeeze the Met fan for every penny they could. Don’t mind paying an honest amount for an honest day at the ball park but there are limits to everything when it then becomes a slap in the face to the loyal fans that not only supported and loved the franchise for over fifty years but also made a nice bit of small change for the Wilpons in the mix.

      From a business perspective one can understand an owner trying to hang onto a business that he loves. As I’ve said before, perhaps had the Wilpons not shown an arrogant and total indifference to the majority of the fan base – even if for only their own business interests and nothing else – we as fans could have even been supportive of them through their troubled times. Perhaps the worst thing they did was hire a Sandy Alderson who reflects that same indifference instead of another corporate executive more in touch with the world outside those executive offices.
      • tlagee January 23, 2013 at 9:56 pm

        Couldn’t agree more.

        The reason that we got Gooden and Strawberry was because of the draft position we got during the 6 – 7 years that the team really sucked. People forget that.

        Will we get gems in the draft if the team continues to suck for years? Of course.

        Will we get relatively good prospects if we trade a Cy Young winner and a guy who hit 32 dingers with close to 100rbi last year? Yup.

        But right now, the way things have been going, we will honestly have to wait until 2019 if we are waiting for the same bounce-back that we got in 1985.

        The GM’s job is not only to get a team’s finances in order – it is to put a competitive team on the field year after year and tinker and trade to replace parts and continue success. Particularly in the world’s number one market where success is not only expected but demanded.

        Sandy may be good with business – he’s just not a good GM.
• Old School Mets Fan January 23, 2013 at 9:23 pm

  Matt, very thorough and thought out response. I don’t think anyone opposes a better farm system and I certainly understand not signing anymore big contracts, but the fact that nothing has been done with the bullpen and that we are agonizing over a two year deal for Scott Hairston, tells me that the financial problems still exist. I am concerned that next year, the Wilpons simply pocket the savings and the 55 million payroll remains untouched.
  • tlagee January 23, 2013 at 9:27 pm

    Old School -

    With the dwindling attendance I doubt the Wilpons will be pocketing much, if any, savings. At this stage, since they are putting a non-competitive team on the field – it will be all about how much comes out of their pocket.

    I hope it’s enough to force them to sell.
• Just-Da-Damaja January 23, 2013 at 9:45 pm

  “Our current GM does not seem to fit the wheeling and dealing persona, he seems more like an economics professor than a gambler. He makes consensus driven decisions, doesn’t spend lavishly on flashy talent, tightly sticks to practical limits, and seems to abide more in the future than the present. For this he appears to be roundly detested by a healthy contingent of fans who still have no real sense of what his “plan” might be.”

  How to make money in NY:

  You win, you make money ( lots of it )
  You dont win, you lose money ( lots of it )

  its really that simple

  You can give all the kudos you want…if the mets are still a team not getting to the playoffs by 2015…citifield will look like a graveyard…

  o wait…

  it damn near already does

  trusting the baseball side to DePo and JP ???

  lmaoooo

  ok
  • Matt Balasis January 23, 2013 at 10:46 pm

    By the end of this coming season, Harvey and Wheeler will be in the rotation, Mejia and Familia may be in the bullpen, D’Arnaud should be behind the plate, and our 100% home-grown infield hopefully will still be in-tact. We may even have an outfielder or two we didn’t start the season with. I don’t expect we’ll be competing for a playoff spot, but my hope is that we’ll start to see exactly what kind of team we’ll expect moving forward.

    Keep in mind, as of now there is a lot of very good pitching coming through the system. The hope is that by next year this time we’ll actually go after the free agents we’ll need to put us over the top. So I believe Sandy when he says 2013 is not a throwaway, my hope is that it is the year when the pieces begin to fall into place.

    Yes, this is NY, and while it would be great if Wilpon sold the team it is extremely unlikely, so what we have is MLB’s hatchet man who comes in and fixes franchises that are bleeding money by slashing payroll and and stocking up on prospects. It’s what he does. But he’s only as good as his baseball associates, JP and DePo … and as Just-D-D points out their history is mixed at best individually, perhaps together they are more than the sum of their flawed pasts — you can’t say they haven’t occasionally struck gold. The financial architecture can be solid as can be (and i believe it will be based on the regulatory oversight of the CBP that mandates a clear delineation between baseball operations and existing debt) but without the foundation of a great minor league system, well, say hello to sustained mediocrity.

    We will know soon enough. I’m giving it one more season before I turn on Mr. Alderson. I think they know it too. You can only blow off the fans so much in NY. The need to show us something before this season is over, no doubt. If they don’t, if they really suck yet again, the Wilpons may just lose the team. A lot is riding on 2013.
    • Metsie January 23, 2013 at 11:30 pm

      “By the end of this coming season, Harvey and Wheeler will be in the rotation, Mejia and Familia may be in the bullpen, D’Arnaud should be behind the plate, and our 100% home-grown infield hopefully will still be in-tact. ”

      All very true….Then add this to that…

      Santana and Bay come off the books lets call that 43 Mil in savings (not really becauase Santana has a buyout to pay and Bay isn’t really saving you all of his salary because of deferrment)

      Minus the 23 Mil we are likely to lose if Attendance merely stays the same
      20 Mil of savings left
      minus 9 Mil for Wright and 2 Mil for Niese as thier contract accelerates in pay.

      9 Mil left to buy an Outfield in 2014
      It wouldnt even buy you a Victorino!

      And if you don’t get it, that young core and Pitching you mentioned gets wasted for at least a year maybe more….Losing control and cheapness due to Arb settlements and normal Raises.

      What will we do?
      Start trading all those pluses you mentioned and the cycle of rinse repeat goes on and on and on…
      • Joey D. January 23, 2013 at 11:44 pm

        Hi Metsie,

        I’m very, very disappointed in you.

        “9 Mil left to buy an Outfield in 2014
        It wouldnt even buy you a Victorino”.

        Not a thing said about our bullpen……
        • Metsie January 24, 2013 at 11:15 am

          Yes but I happen to agree with some that we are not going to buy our way out of the Pen problems….

          Maybe a closer but the rest will likely come from within.
          • Matt Balasis January 24, 2013 at 11:54 am

            I can’t stand Shame Beefarino … easily one of the dirtiest players in the league.